Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And after the PC crowd finish off the smokers and turn to those evil anti-choicers, everyone can live in peace at least the abortionists can, right?
BTW: I don't smoke but I am an "evil anti-choicer".
Immie
When I started working 30 years ago, I worked with a 3 pack a day smoker. At the end of the day, my eyes were red and my hair and clothes stank. I was told if I didn't like it, find work elsewhere
Now it is the smokers who are inconvenienced
Doesn't bother me in the least
Both my parents smoked. I never realized how bad it smelled (in my hair, on my clothes) until I moved out of the house and then went home to visit. Believe me, I understand where you are coming from on that.
However, when I think about removing the rights of smokers, I then have to think about my own rights and what do I enjoy doing that others might find offensive? I like to drink beer or wine occasionally. Trust me occasionally is an overstatement. It is very rare, but I do enjoy both. So, how will I feel if someone decides to make it illegal to drink beer or wine?
In this case, I am opposed to the Nanny State taking away the rights of others. Of course, I am not afraid to enter a smoke filled room so I don't whine if I go into a restaurant that allows smoking.
I don't approve of smoking, but I am not on board with the thought of making it illegal to smoke.
Immie
When I started working 30 years ago, I worked with a 3 pack a day smoker. At the end of the day, my eyes were red and my hair and clothes stank. I was told if I didn't like it, find work elsewhere
Now it is the smokers who are inconvenienced
Doesn't bother me in the least
Both my parents smoked. I never realized how bad it smelled (in my hair, on my clothes) until I moved out of the house and then went home to visit. Believe me, I understand where you are coming from on that.
However, when I think about removing the rights of smokers, I then have to think about my own rights and what do I enjoy doing that others might find offensive? I like to drink beer or wine occasionally. Trust me occasionally is an overstatement. It is very rare, but I do enjoy both. So, how will I feel if someone decides to make it illegal to drink beer or wine?
In this case, I am opposed to the Nanny State taking away the rights of others. Of course, I am not afraid to enter a smoke filled room so I don't whine if I go into a restaurant that allows smoking.
I don't approve of smoking, but I am not on board with the thought of making it illegal to smoke.
Immie
And to Rightwinger's point:
You're right that it's a dying breed, but I'd prefer this one die by the "market" rather than by force. I know that now that I've seen the luxury of non-smoking places, I won't become a patron of smoking places and so I think it would all work itself out on it's own without the intrusive laws.
When I started working 30 years ago, I worked with a 3 pack a day smoker. At the end of the day, my eyes were red and my hair and clothes stank. I was told if I didn't like it, find work elsewhere
Now it is the smokers who are inconvenienced
Doesn't bother me in the least
Both my parents smoked. I never realized how bad it smelled (in my hair, on my clothes) until I moved out of the house and then went home to visit. Believe me, I understand where you are coming from on that.
However, when I think about removing the rights of smokers, I then have to think about my own rights and what do I enjoy doing that others might find offensive? I like to drink beer or wine occasionally. Trust me occasionally is an overstatement. It is very rare, but I do enjoy both. So, how will I feel if someone decides to make it illegal to drink beer or wine?
In this case, I am opposed to the Nanny State taking away the rights of others. Of course, I am not afraid to enter a smoke filled room so I don't whine if I go into a restaurant that allows smoking.
I don't approve of smoking, but I am not on board with the thought of making it illegal to smoke.
Immie
And to Rightwinger's point:
You're right that it's a dying breed, but I'd prefer this one die by the "market" rather than by force. I know that now that I've seen the luxury of non-smoking places, I won't become a patron of smoking places and so I think it would all work itself out on it's own without the intrusive laws.
Both my parents smoked. I never realized how bad it smelled (in my hair, on my clothes) until I moved out of the house and then went home to visit. Believe me, I understand where you are coming from on that.
However, when I think about removing the rights of smokers, I then have to think about my own rights and what do I enjoy doing that others might find offensive? I like to drink beer or wine occasionally. Trust me occasionally is an overstatement. It is very rare, but I do enjoy both. So, how will I feel if someone decides to make it illegal to drink beer or wine?
In this case, I am opposed to the Nanny State taking away the rights of others. Of course, I am not afraid to enter a smoke filled room so I don't whine if I go into a restaurant that allows smoking.
I don't approve of smoking, but I am not on board with the thought of making it illegal to smoke.
Immie
And to Rightwinger's point:
You're right that it's a dying breed, but I'd prefer this one die by the "market" rather than by force. I know that now that I've seen the luxury of non-smoking places, I won't become a patron of smoking places and so I think it would all work itself out on it's own without the intrusive laws.
That is exactly how I see things. Given the choice I will patronize non-smoking establishments and maybe eventually they will become the norm in most industries. But, I would prefer that happen by choice rather than force.
Immie
And to Rightwinger's point:
You're right that it's a dying breed, but I'd prefer this one die by the "market" rather than by force. I know that now that I've seen the luxury of non-smoking places, I won't become a patron of smoking places and so I think it would all work itself out on it's own without the intrusive laws.
That is exactly how I see things. Given the choice I will patronize non-smoking establishments and maybe eventually they will become the norm in most industries. But, I would prefer that happen by choice rather than force.
Immie
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
its not the point , they want you to stop smoking , ok , we all know what you rick , in the civil war they were called coffin nails , its no big news , but to say you can't ?That is exactly how I see things. Given the choice I will patronize non-smoking establishments and maybe eventually they will become the norm in most industries. But, I would prefer that happen by choice rather than force.
Immie
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
And to Rightwinger's point:
You're right that it's a dying breed, but I'd prefer this one die by the "market" rather than by force. I know that now that I've seen the luxury of non-smoking places, I won't become a patron of smoking places and so I think it would all work itself out on it's own without the intrusive laws.
That is exactly how I see things. Given the choice I will patronize non-smoking establishments and maybe eventually they will become the norm in most industries. But, I would prefer that happen by choice rather than force.
Immie
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
Yes. Many did in MN.WOOOOOOOOOSH!Of course, this means that EVERY person who favored indoor smoking bans now FAVORS removal of the ban in Casinos because of the money. All of them. It was ALL a ruse.
The point is that all the self-righteous twaddle about "public health" is far less important than making sure the loot keeps a-rolling into the coffers for the ruling class.
Of course, all of the bar and restaurant operators put out of business by their pious proltroonery can go suck a big chili dog.
Honest question. Did a lot of bars/restaurants go under because of smoking bans?
That is exactly how I see things. Given the choice I will patronize non-smoking establishments and maybe eventually they will become the norm in most industries. But, I would prefer that happen by choice rather than force.
Immie
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
If I choose to smoke on my own property, any around me are also making a choice for themselves. They can choose to be there. Or not. Same as those who might want to smoke but which I ask not to on my own property. They can choose to be there. Or not. But I will choose what will and will not be the case on my own property. I do not want you or the government to choose for me.
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
Like some of us couldn't see this one coming from miles away....
Sent to the floor of the Illinois House of Representatives Wednesday was HB1965, a bill that would lift the ban on smoking in all gaming facilities established close to another state that is yet to pass a smoking ban. The provision would sunset if or when that neighboring state decides to ban smoking. Rep. Andre Thapedi, D-Chicago authored and sponsored a similar bill that would have required casinos construct separate, sealed off smoking rooms equipped with ventilation systems. His bill, HB0171, remains in committee, but he says he supports the legislation before the House.
“We are $15 billion dollars in debt, that’s to start,” said Rep. Andre Thapedi, D-Chicago, author and sponsor of the bill, about why it is a good idea to exempt gaming facilities from the ban. “Secondly, people who choose to smoke are going to smoke. It makes no sense from a social analysis and an economic analysis to prohibit people from smoking in a safe way.”
<snip.>
Rep. Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, supported the 2008 ban, but has changed his stance. Now, he says, consideration comes down to economics.
“The fact of the matter is we are losing revenue,” he said. “People like to smoke when they’re gambling, that is an attraction for individuals. I think we need to be careful when applying things so broadly, we have to consider what kind of impact it is going to have on the industry.”
Fight to Lift Smoking Ban in Casinos, Bars Ignites in Springfield - Bolingbrook, IL Patch
There you have it....After all that paternalistic, finger-wagging crapola about concern for "public health", we find out where the true worship of the almighty buck over "public health" lives; in the ruling class.
Your "right" to smoke ends at my nose.
Smoking is a choice not a right. You choose to smoke. You choose where and when you smoke. The former "right" to light up wherever and whenever you choose is now gone and smokers have nobody to blame but themselves. Their rude and filthy habit eventually led society to say enough
I do not feel sorry for them.......they never felt sorry for me
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
Like some of us couldn't see this one coming from miles away....
Sent to the floor of the Illinois House of Representatives Wednesday was HB1965, a bill that would lift the ban on smoking in all gaming facilities established close to another state that is yet to pass a smoking ban. The provision would sunset if or when that neighboring state decides to ban smoking. Rep. Andre Thapedi, D-Chicago authored and sponsored a similar bill that would have required casinos construct separate, sealed off smoking rooms equipped with ventilation systems. His bill, HB0171, remains in committee, but he says he supports the legislation before the House.
We are $15 billion dollars in debt, thats to start, said Rep. Andre Thapedi, D-Chicago, author and sponsor of the bill, about why it is a good idea to exempt gaming facilities from the ban. Secondly, people who choose to smoke are going to smoke. It makes no sense from a social analysis and an economic analysis to prohibit people from smoking in a safe way.
<snip.>
Rep. Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, supported the 2008 ban, but has changed his stance. Now, he says, consideration comes down to economics.
The fact of the matter is we are losing revenue, he said. People like to smoke when theyre gambling, that is an attraction for individuals. I think we need to be careful when applying things so broadly, we have to consider what kind of impact it is going to have on the industry.
Fight to Lift Smoking Ban in Casinos, Bars Ignites in Springfield - Bolingbrook, IL Patch
There you have it....After all that paternalistic, finger-wagging crapola about concern for "public health", we find out where the true worship of the almighty buck over "public health" lives; in the ruling class.
how about free choice...whats next...control the publics food intake for there own good..limit there activities to reduce injury...how boiut the state gets off my damn back instead....if you think its so healthy or such a great idea go and represents what people want go open a non-smoking casino
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
If I choose to smoke on my own property, any around me are also making a choice for themselves. They can choose to be there. Or not. Same as those who might want to smoke but which I ask not to on my own property. They can choose to be there. Or not. But I will choose what will and will not be the case on my own property. I do not want you or the government to choose for me.
Go ahead and smoke on your property. Your business is a different issue. You do not have a right to force your employees to work in a hazardous smoke filled environment. "if you do not like it, find work elsewhere" is not an accepted defense. Same goes for your customers, you are not allowed to subject them to hazardous conditions that you can control
Like some of us couldn't see this one coming from miles away....
Fight to Lift Smoking Ban in Casinos, Bars Ignites in Springfield - Bolingbrook, IL Patch
There you have it....After all that paternalistic, finger-wagging crapola about concern for "public health", we find out where the true worship of the almighty buck over "public health" lives; in the ruling class.
how about free choice...whats next...control the publics food intake for there own good..limit there activities to reduce injury...how boiut the state gets off my damn back instead....if you think its so healthy or such a great idea go and represents what people want go open a non-smoking casino
What's next?
Why they have already started in on fast food restaurants. They are trying to dictate what McDonald's can serve. Soon you will not be able to buy a Big Mac and Fries. You will have to buy a McSalad and carrot sticks.
Immie
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
My contention, only contention, with your points in this thread are the ones in which you seem to believe that you have the right to dictate to a business owner whether or not he/she will allow smoking on his/her property. My feelings are that it is the business owners right to make that choice and if you oppose his/her decision then you have every right not to frequent the establishment. Your opposition does not grant you the right to dictate to the business owner.
Immie
It isn't a matter of pity. I have no right to smoke on YOUR property without your permission. I just want the right to smoke on my property even if I choose not to do that or allow anyone else to do that.
Don't you see that nobody here is arguing that smoking is a good thing or that anybody ought to be doing it? Nobody is arguing that it is aesthetically pleasing to most non smokers.
What we ARE arguing for is for the ability to choose for ourselves what we will and won't tolerate or allow on our own property. Once you give the government ability to choose for you, you have no rights that the government cannot take away with a moment's whim.
If you were choosing for yourself, I would not have a problem. But when you choose to smoke, you are making a choice for those around you
NO you aren't. And IF i Blew Smoke in YOUR face...are YOU gonna charge me with ASSAULT?
